Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buddleja 'Podaras11' = Flutterby Lavender


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ✗ plicit  13:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Buddleja 'Podaras11' = Flutterby Lavender

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The first article in this AfD, Buddleja 'Podaras11' = Flutterby Lavender, was kept at AfD in 2012 under the premise, not supported by policy, that having a comprehensive documentation of Buddleja cultivars was valuable, whether they met WP:GNG or not. Per strong recent consensus, this is no longer considered the case, and cultivars/hybrids/other minor ranks are expected to meet GNG in order for an article to be retained. (Please see the discussion at WT:PLANTS, the unanimously-deleted cultivar AfDs listed here as well as another bundled AfD).

In my opinion GNG is not met here. The first source is a patent, which is primary/not independent. The second isn't unreliable, but I'm not sure I'd call it significant coverage. Everything that came up on a search of the sales name or the actual name was a commercial listing or otherwise trivial. A single RS isn't enough to keep this. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

The following articles are in the same "Flutterby" series of cultivars, so I may as well do them all at once, as they all have similar sourcing problems.
 * Buddleja 'Podaras1' = Flutterby Grande Vanilla
 * Buddleja 'Podaras3' = Flutterby Grande Tangerine Dream
 * Buddleja 'Podaras6' = Flutterby Peace
 * Buddleja 'Podaras9' = Flutterby Pink
 * Buddleja 'Podaras10' = Flutterby Petite Dark Pink
 * Buddleja 'Podaras12' = Flutterby Flow Lavender
 * Buddleja 'Podaras13' = Flutterby Petite Tutti Fruitti Pink
 * Buddleja 'Podaras15' = Flutterby Petite Snow White


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - Keep on pruning (pun intneded) these cultivar lists. PianoDan (talk) 18:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing to say about these cultivars, no sources other than catelogues. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:SIGCOV is needed, and catalogues do not pass that requirement. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable with a fall back position of merging all of them into a single reasonably written article. Gusfriend (talk) 05:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Merging has been discussed in the previous discussions, and is generally not considered a suitable option for these cultivars - there are hundreds of Buddleja cultivars, and very very few have sufficient reliable sourcing to even be worth merging. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:09, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.